Re: Runtime accepting build discrepancies

From: Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>
To: Laszlo Hornyak <kocka(at)forgeahead(dot)hu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Runtime accepting build discrepancies
Date: 2005-03-11 00:36:31
Message-ID: 4230E80F.2000903@mailblocks.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Laszlo Hornyak wrote:

> IMHO this is why decoupling is good and neccesary. If one configures
> the RDBMS to use different another of data, then I simply replace a
> couple of lines in the data mapping configuration. In the case of
> custom datatypes in PostgreSQL, the same happens. This is no code
> modification nor recomplitation in PL-J, only a reconfiguration.
> This is why I have sent that link, but this configuration file
> fragment may explain it better:
> <typemapper>
> <map>
> <type db="timestamp"
> class="org.pgj.typemapping.postgres.PGTimestamp"/>
> <!-- type db="timestamp"
> class="org.pgj.typemapping.postgres.PGTimestampINT64"/ -->

Sure Laszlo. That solves everything. But where do you get the
information on what to comment out and what to use in the first place?

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2005-03-11 01:27:03 Re: Raw size
Previous Message John R Pierce 2005-03-11 00:32:53 Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP